Key Bridge (Round Who Knows But Probably Not Last)

[kphoger]

[Rothman]

Maryland said, "Too high," Kiewit couldn't bring it down

MDTA rejected the price as too high, and Kiewit declined to sign a GMP at a lower number.

Those mean the same thing.

Kiewit -wouldn't- bring it down. No sale.

Which means they got fired.

"I didn't get fired.  I quit!" -- Kiewit

[Rothman]

What is life for a roadgeek, if not splitting hairs?  Quite empty, indeed.

[Beltway]

If anything, the off‑ramp reads closer to MDTA getting fired than Kiewit.

MDTA couldn't accept the GMP, couldn't fund the GMP, and couldn't produce the federal/state financing package required to support the GMP. Kiewit held their number. When the owner can't meet the conditions for a guaranteed‑maximum‑price contract, the contractor doesn't get "fired" -- the project owner effectively disqualifies itself.

The off‑ramp didn't trigger because Kiewit walked. It triggered because MDTA couldn't meet the prerequisites for a multi‑billion‑dollar GMP.

From Kiewit's perspective, this project was loaded with cesium‑137 and strontium‑90 -- too much risk, too little certainty, and no funding package behind the number.

[kphoger]

MDTA couldn't accept the GMP, couldn't fund the GMP, and couldn't produce the federal/state financing package required to support the GMP.

MDTA -wouldn't- accept it.  No dolphins.

[Rothman]

If anything, the off‑ramp reads closer to MDTA getting fired than Kiewit.

MDTA couldn't accept the GMP, couldn't fund the GMP, and couldn't produce the federal/state financing package required to support the GMP. Kiewit held their number. When the owner can't meet the conditions for a guaranteed‑maximum‑price contract, the contractor doesn't get "fired" -- the project owner effectively disqualifies itself.

The off‑ramp didn't trigger because Kiewit walked. It triggered because MDTA couldn't meet the prerequisites for a multi‑billion‑dollar GMP.

From Kiewit's perspective, this project was loaded with cesium‑137 and strontium‑90 -- too much risk, too little certainty, and no funding package behind the number.

Wait, how much did Kiewit pay MDTA as their consultant, then?  I mean, to be fired, you have to be working and paid by someone, right?

This is taking "I didn't get fired, I quit" to an astronomical level.

MDTA hired the contractor and fired the contractor.  That's all there is to it.

[Beltway]

Kiewit is finishing the contracted Phase 1 and is not participating in Phase 2 because the GMP negotiation failed.

Phase 2 -- the actual replacement‑bridge construction -- never existed as a signed contract.

There was no Phase 2 contract to "fire" anyone from. You cannot fire a contractor from a phase that was never executed.

Kiewit is a Tier‑1 megaproject builder. From their perspective, this job was radioactive: too much risk, too little certainty, and no funding package behind the number.

[Rothman]

You didn't answer the question.

I'll take this over that sillyness: https://mdta.maryland.gov/blog-category/mdta-news-releases/maryland-transportation-authority-ramp-progressive-design-build

"MDTA will not retain Kiewit's services for Phase 2 construction. In order to put the best interests of taxpayers first, MDTA will go back to the market to negotiate the best deal to deliver this bridge as quickly and safely as possible."

[kphoger]

Kiewit is finishing the contracted Phase 1 and is not participating in Phase 2 because the GMP negotiation failed.

Phase 2 -- the actual replacement‑bridge construction -- never existed as a signed contract.

There was no Phase 2 contract to "fire" anyone from. You cannot fire a contractor from a phase that was never executed.

Kiewit is a Tier‑1 megaproject builder. From their perspective, this job was radioactive: too much risk, too little certainty, and no funding package behind the number.

I work for a cable company.  Our field techs are contractors.  That's like saying that, if we terminate one of them after his route is done for the day, then we didn't technically fire him, because he hadn't started his next day's route yet.  Technically true, perhaps, because he wasn't technically our employee, and because he hadn't technically been given a route yet—but, realistically, we fired him.

[Beltway]

MDTA will never publicly acknowledge that the GMP collapse reflects a fundamental misalignment between scope, risk, and cost; that the 70% design is not buildable; that the procurement is now structurally unattractive to Tier‑1 contractors; that ER funding has already rolled off; that the schedule is no longer tethered to the advertised 2030 date; or that a full NEPA reset is the only technically defensible path. But every one of those points is procedurally true.

Agencies don't admit these things because doing so would concede that the original cost envelope was unrealistic, trigger political blowback, undermine confidence in the procurement, complicate federal coordination, and force a public acknowledgment that the timeline has slipped a decade.

We are looking at 2037 to 2042 before a new crossing may be in place.

[Beltway]

I work for a cable company.  Our field techs are contractors.  That's like saying that, if we terminate one of them after his route is done for the day, then we didn't technically fire him, because he hadn't started his next day's route yet.  Technically true, perhaps, because he wasn't technically our employee, and because he hadn't technically been given a route yet—but, realistically, we fired him.

Apples and tomatoes.

A cable‑company day‑route is a labor assignment.

A Progressive Design‑Build megaproject is a two‑phase procurement structure where Phase 2 does not legally exist until a GMP is accepted and funded.

Kiewit is finishing the contracted Phase 1. Phase 2 was never a signed contract, never funded, and never executed. There is nothing to "fire" anyone from when the GMP negotiation fails and the off‑ramp triggers by design.

I can assure you that the Kiewit project engineers are not crying in their beer over this -- they are relieved by not having an albatross around their neck.

[Rothman]

What is the value of one of Beltway's assurances?

[kphoger]

What is the value of one of Beltway's assurances?

$6.49 plus tax

[Plutonic Panda]

What is the value of one of Beltway's assurances?

Ensuring that oranges won't be part of whatever equation he uses.

[Max Rockatansky]

What is the value of one of Beltway's assurances?

I'll pay less than a penny for his thoughts. 

[The_Ginger]

What is the value of one of Beltway's assurances?

I'll pay less than a penny for his thoughts. 

What about half cents? 

[kphoger]

What about half cents?

If you haven't got a ha'penny, a farthing will do.  If you haven't got a farthing, then God bless you!

[vdeane]

What is the value of one of Beltway's assurances?

Not much, considering he's an IT person trying to use the fact that he worked for VDOT to present himself as an expert.

[kphoger]

... trying to use the fact that he worked for VDOT to present himself as an expert.

Actually, I don't think he has done that at all.  It's the rest of us, who know that he used to work for VDOT, who keep bringing it up.  I don't actually remember him saying it about himself.  If anything, he seems to have disliked the fact that we know and share any personal details about him at all—which is strange, considering that he was a staple member of the forum's earlier days...

[Max Rockatansky]

... trying to use the fact that he worked for VDOT to present himself as an expert.

Actually, I don't think he has done that at all.  It's the rest of us, who know that he used to work for VDOT, who keep bringing it up.  I don't actually remember him saying it about himself.  If anything, he seems to have disliked the fact that we know and share any personal details about him at all—which is strange, considering that he was a staple member of the forum's earlier days...

The omission becomes pretty glaring however when you consider that Beltway tries to present himself as having a qualified opinion.  What is worse for me (as an observer) is that he actively argues with people who are actual highway engineers.  I can certainly understand why said engineers might not take so kindly to an IT and hobby page guy trying to force his opinion as the only one that is correct.

But yeah, I'm also not understanding how a guy who has been a fairly well-known part of the road fan hobby for decades is worried about people knowing his name.  It wasn't exactly like he was hiding it on the earlier threads when he kept posting links to his "detailed analysis."

[Beltway]

None of the highway engineers I'm aware of are posting about the Key Bridge, and I'm not arguing with any in this thread.

 In any case, disagreements should be addressed on the substance, not on job titles.

[vdeane]

... trying to use the fact that he worked for VDOT to present himself as an expert.

Actually, I don't think he has done that at all.  It's the rest of us, who know that he used to work for VDOT, who keep bringing it up.  I don't actually remember him saying it about himself.  If anything, he seems to have disliked the fact that we know and share any personal details about him at all—which is strange, considering that he was a staple member of the forum's earlier days...

The omission becomes pretty glaring however when you consider that Beltway tries to present himself as having a qualified opinion.  What is worse for me (as an observer) is that he actively argues with people who are actual highway engineers.  I can certainly understand why said engineers might not take so kindly to an IT and hobby page guy trying to force his opinion as the only one that is correct.

But yeah, I'm also not understanding how a guy who has been a fairly well-known part of the road fan hobby for decades is worried about people knowing his name.  It wasn't exactly like he was hiding it on the earlier threads when he kept posting links to his "detailed analysis."

I've heard that he tries to throw around the fact that he was a DOT employee when engaging with agencies and is probably well aware that there are people in the roadgeek hobby who collectively have enough knowledge to ruin his ability to do that if it somehow got out.  I remember when he kept claiming that this forum was some kind of "record of discourse" and why he had to make his arguments as a "legacy steward".  If that's how he wants to play, may as well have the full truth out there.

[Max Rockatansky]

... trying to use the fact that he worked for VDOT to present himself as an expert.

Actually, I don't think he has done that at all.  It's the rest of us, who know that he used to work for VDOT, who keep bringing it up.  I don't actually remember him saying it about himself.  If anything, he seems to have disliked the fact that we know and share any personal details about him at all—which is strange, considering that he was a staple member of the forum's earlier days...

The omission becomes pretty glaring however when you consider that Beltway tries to present himself as having a qualified opinion.  What is worse for me (as an observer) is that he actively argues with people who are actual highway engineers.  I can certainly understand why said engineers might not take so kindly to an IT and hobby page guy trying to force his opinion as the only one that is correct.

But yeah, I'm also not understanding how a guy who has been a fairly well-known part of the road fan hobby for decades is worried about people knowing his name.  It wasn't exactly like he was hiding it on the earlier threads when he kept posting links to his "detailed analysis."

I've heard that he tries to throw around the fact that he was a DOT employee when engaging with agencies and is probably well aware that there are people in the roadgeek hobby who collectively have enough knowledge to ruin his ability to do that if it somehow got out.  I remember when he kept claiming that this forum was some kind of "record of discourse" and why he had to make his arguments as a "legacy steward".  Maybe if we make that detrimental enough to him and his ego, he'll go away.  In any case, I figure it has a better shot of working then trolling about dolphins every time he posts.

The fact that Kyle dug up a quote from Jake in 2012 proposing a "Beltway in one thread" indicates to me that this has been a thing for almost forever.  I think by now this is pretty much all of this is open book knowledge in the hobby mainstream.

[Rothman]

... trying to use the fact that he worked for VDOT to present himself as an expert.

Actually, I don't think he has done that at all.  It's the rest of us, who know that he used to work for VDOT, who keep bringing it up.  I don't actually remember him saying it about himself.  If anything, he seems to have disliked the fact that we know and share any personal details about him at all—which is strange, considering that he was a staple member of the forum's earlier days...

The omission becomes pretty glaring however when you consider that Beltway tries to present himself as having a qualified opinion.  What is worse for me (as an observer) is that he actively argues with people who are actual highway engineers. 

Although you may not have referred to me, just for the record, I'm not an engineer and never claimed to be (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=18691.msg2172782#msg2172782 as one long-ago example of me stating this...probably was time for a reminder...).

Truth be told, I have no idea what Beltway did at VDOT during his tenure there.  I've heard different things from different people and have dismissed all of them until Beltway chooses to say himself -- I don't like rumors.  Have no problem with him keeping his former career private.

Every roadgeek has ideas ranging from the insane to the quixotic to the fluffy to the quite reasonable.  Most of us temper them with an understanding that agency employees and contractors operate within a whole variety of parameters.  Sure, a section of highway may have needed a more thorough treatment or a widening, but the people actually involved in the project took into account what was possible given available resources and policy (and then said it could wait 10 years to do the right thing, if they used federal funds) and did what they could, just as a hypothetical example.

I think most people on the forum when presented with reasons why agencies or contractors do what they do in the face of their more grandiose ideas go, "Ohhhhh, okay" in some manner, however begrudgingly.  It's the few -- on the outside, looking at a facade of what is going on inside -- that go, "I still know better because I've 'done my own research' and I'm going to dismiss the possibility that I don't know everything about a project or processes" that are stupefying, whether they have a PE license or not.

Have to say I make an exception for dissenting PEs or analysts that were absolutely privy to all the events in a project's development and design and were overruled and still have their outstanding concerns.  Still, at the end of the day, it becomes "We'll see if your concerns were merited."  Maybe people misunderstand that teams are brought to bear on projects, rather than just lone engineers, all the way down to your simple pavement markings contract (albeit a smaller team ). 

And, of course, because public/private entities sometimes make outright mistakes, these armchair observers that hang onto their opinions even when faced with evidence to the contrary hang onto that fact like a lifeline.  Some make the mistake of thinking a mistake is an end of a saga, rather than just a chapter.  But, the conclusion that, "See? You should have listened to me!" can be dead wrong with someone who's complaining about everything out there, essentially crying wolf.  Just because one's complaints were in the end valid in one instance, it doesn't make all those times when they did not bear out go away.  One can become an unreliable source, whether or not they're right one time out of however many.  Reputation, track record, qualifications and experience do matter.

Finally, on the Internet, there are of course privacy considerations and no one should be forced to say what they are or have been.  But certainly people can say without breaking those privacy boundaries what they are not to prevent people from misunderstanding or assuming what one's qualifications actually are.  So, again, just so I'm not a fake, I am not an engineer.

[kphoger]

Truth be told, I have no idea what Beltway did at VDOT during his tenure there.  I've heard different things from different people and have dismissed all of them until Beltway chooses to say himself -- I don't like rumors.  Have no problem with him keeping his former career private.

Good, then.  Just read his own website:

I worked for 10 years (1974-1984) in highway safety improvement design, highway construction inspection, and highway location & design; and in information technology 1984-2017. My highest education level is a masters degree in business information systems and a masters degree in biblical studies.